• 0 Posts
  • 16 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 14th, 2023

help-circle





  • English teachers will only give you an arbitrary, subjective answer about whether it’s a word - you want a linguist if you want an objective answer.

    Since we’re dealing with two different “words” (roots) here, factory and overclocked, the first thing to look for is compound stress. Many compound words in English get initial stress: compare “blackbird” and “a black bird”.

    This isn’t foolproof, however. For some speakers there are compounds that don’t get compound stress - some speakers say “paper towel” as expected, while others say “paper towel”, but it’s still a compound either way.

    So how can we actually tell that paper towel is one word? See if the first member of the potential compound (the non-head) can be modified in any way.

    For example, we know doghouse is a compound because in “a big doghouse” big can only refer to the house, and cannot refer to “the house of a big dog”. Similarly, blackboard must be one word because it can take what appear to be contradictory modifiers: " a green blackboard".

    So, in the same way, paper towel and toilet paper are one word because “big paper towel” can’t mean “a towel made from big paper” and “pink toilet paper” can’t mean “paper for a pink toilet”. (Toilet paper also gets compound stress.)

    Yet another way to test is by semantic drift (meaning shift). As mentioned earlier, blackboards don’t have to be black, so the meaning of the compound doesn’t perfectly correspond to the pieces of the word - instead, the fact that it’s a vertical board you write on in chalk is much more important to the meaning. This is because once the pieces combine to form a new word, that new word can start to shift away from the meaning of the pieces. Again, however this process takes time, so it’s not a perfect test.

    So, back to the original question: is “factory-overclocked” one word?

    Well, it doesn’t get compound stress, and for me I can still say things like “it’s home-factory-overclocked” to mean that it was overclocked in its home factory, so the first member can take modifiers. And, the whole thing still means what the pieces mean.

    So, in my grammar, “factory-overclocked” is two words. But for some of you “home factory overclocked” may not be possible, which would indicate that it’s started to become one word for you. Everyone’s grammar is different, but we can still test for these categories.

    If you instead mean by your question, “can factory and overclocked be combined with a hyphen?”, however, I can’t help you, because language-specific writing conventions are subjective and arbitrary, and not something that linguists usually care very much about.






  • objective relative to the rules or conventions of visual storytelling in an anatomic sense

    Ok, do you have a handy list of these objective narrative measures then, along with precise, unambiguous methods of quantifying them in a manner that can objectively determine an action movie’s quality?

    that is motivated by the character’s actions on the screen

    This is a subjective determination, unless you can somehow quantifiably show otherwise. How can we objectively know when a character’s actions are or aren’t sufficiently “motivated”? And even if the beginning-middle-end can somehow be shown to be objectively motivated by the character’s actions on the screen, how can you prove that a lack of this sort of beginning-middle-end is objectively bad?

    the lack of wasted frames on characters

    This is a subjective determination, unless you can somehow quantifiably show otherwise. How can “wasted” be objectively defined here? How do we even know that “wasted” frames are objectively bad?

    There isn’t unmotivated action.

    This is a subjective determination, unless you can somehow quantifiably show otherwise. How can “unmotivated” be objectively defined here? How do we even know that “unmotivated” action is objectively bad?

    There is not an unnecessary or missing character on screen.

    This is a subjective determination, unless you can somehow quantifiably show otherwise. How can “unnecessary” or “missing” be objectively defined here? Also, how do we even know that “unnecessary” or “missing” characters are objectively bad?

    And the framing from edit to edit does not yank your eye somewhere it’s not meant to be.

    By your subjective judgment, unless you can somehow show otherwise. Also, how do we even know that the camera yanking your eye somewhere its not meant to be is objectively bad?

    Bourne Ultimatum […] has an insane volume of superfluous or narratively unmotivated camera coverage in its action

    This is a subjective determination, unless you can somehow quantifiably show otherwise. How can “superfluous” and “narratively unmotivated” be objectively defined here? And even if they could, how can you show that this is objectively bad?

    there are definitely objective storytelling mechanics that are binary insofar as they are present or not on a scene to scene, shot to shot basis.

    Great! Back to my original question then, since nothing you’ve said here has been relevant to it: what are they, and by what metrics are they precisely defined and quantified? And more importantly, how does that objectively prove that Fury Road is a top 10 action movie?

    In short, judging art is always subjective. That is inescapable, and attempts to “objectify” it are doomed to fail, because in the end there’s just no accounting for taste. You can tell me why you like Fury Road, and you can even show me that your opinion lines up with “critics” or professors at your film school, but even that is an appeal to authority, and their opinions have as little to do with true objectivity as yours or mine do.

    There are many things that are objectively provable, but Fury Road being a top 10 action movie according to “narrative measures” is not one of them.